Countering The Accusation That There is Nothing New in My Books

One of the most common claims about my books, coming mostly from Christians but also from a few atheists, neither of whom have any credentials or body of work to their names, is the accusation that there is nothing new in them. I think the reason they say this is because it makes them sound intelligent. For it's very very difficult to come up with a new argument in this late stage of human understanding. Anyone can say this with little fear of being wrong (except when it comes to new scientific findings). Any ignoramus can say such a thing too. It makes them sound superior without actually doing the hard work themselves, of in-depth researching for the best arguments in the available literature and then trying to make a good case themselves. Confound the ancients, they've stolen all of our ideas! So here's my attempt at disabusing them of this claim, something I recently wrote in response to an atheist who said it about the book God or Godless?:
When people like you say there is nothing new in this book, what do you mean? Nothing new for the readers? How do you know that? I suspect there is a great deal new for most readers, especially Christians. Nothing new in that all of these arguments can be found elsewhere? If so, can you show me where you found all of these arguments prior to reading this book? Take as just one example, my rebuttal to Rauser concerning objective beauty. Where did you find that specific argument elsewhere prior to reading this book? If you didn't find it elsewhere, then even if you're assumption is correct, what does it matter if it was new to you? Nothing new in that you did not learn anything from reading the book? I almost always learn something from every book I read, sometimes a lot, sometimes a little. It took me a lifetime to know what to focus on in my ten chosen topics to disabuse Christians of their faith, if anything can. Furthermore, do you have such a broad understanding of all these issues to be able to do as well? If so, why aren't YOU doing it? If you are doing it, then where can I read your works so I can judge your competency?

Dr. Robert M. Price reviewed this book for "Free Inquiry" magazine and said I wrote "with unpretentious clarity, common sense, and broad but inconspicuous erudition." I want you to look up the words "broad" "inconspicuous" and "erudition." Then I want you to explain why a recognized scholar would say the exact opposite of what you did in this review. Cheers.